[[ Justice Kennedy commented that Colorado has not been tolerant of Jack Phillips.
And there it is, the crux of the case: tolerance. Should a state be tolerant of its citizens’ religious beliefs? May it disallow certain beliefs with which it disagrees, demanding that its citizens express antithetical beliefs or face punishment?]]
In the days of kings, evil kings FORCED Christians to bow to idols or face death- they FORCED Christians to violate their strongly held religious beliefs, or face death or punishment-
Are we now forcing religious people to bow to the gay idol/agenda?
[[Justice Kennedy ... questioned whether ruling in Phillips’s favor would allow shop owners to post signs in their windows such as “no gays allowed” or “no cakes for gay weddings.”
Yes, A Store owner should be able to post ‘no cakes for gay weddings because it is against our religious moral beliefs” Every bit as much as they should be allowed to post a sign which states something along the liens of “We will not make cakes for those who practice child sacrifices because it is against our religious moral beliefs-” OR “We will not bake cakes that celebrate pedophilia because it is against our religious moral beliefs”
This is NOT a civil rights issue- the refusal to baKE the cake has nothing to do with the color of skin one is born with- It has EVERYTHING to do with the fact that two people CHOOSE to practice a sin that is in direct violation of the religious store owner’s religion
I really wish a muslim baker had been a codefendent- The SC would have puckered their poopers in fear of offending muslism by ruling they can not decline ot bake cakes for gays
Maybe this will come out like Hobby Lobby. If it’s a personal or closely held business it may choose.
And the “gay” world will raise a stink for a whole week then forget it.